The traditional dispensational view is that the rejection of Jesus by the Jews resulted in the postponement of the kingdom. Traditionally, that point of postponement has been posited at Matthew 12, or, some dispensationalists actually place it in Acts 3 (Thomas Ice for instance seems to lean this direction). See the DVD of my debate with Thomas Ice.
The problem– one of many– for the millennial view is that Peter affirms in no uncertain terms that Joel 2 and Psalms 110 were being fulfilled on Pentecost. Those two prophecies were patently OT prophecies made to Israel, for her last days. So, if Pentecost was “on time” then the seventy week countdown was right on time– and dispensationalism is destroyed.
Well, it now seems that there is another “twist” on the postponement theory. A viewer of my YouTube videos (link) sent the following email to me, and I sent a (very) brief response. I am putting his edited post below, with my response.
This is an important development in the dispensational theology, but, in truth, it actually compounds their problem. It solves nothing!
Take a look and pass this along.
I am Blackbear58 from YouTube who several days ago encouraged you to keep up the good teaching.
As I mentioned I have been searching out the truth on whether dispensationalism is biblical and concluded it to be false.
I ran across the below dispensational website accidentally.
It has a different twist to the conventional dispensationalist time lime and thought. One thing they believe is the delay of the restoration of the Kingdom starts after the stoning of Steven. They therefore would say that the the prophesies in Psalms and Joel is not part of the silence in the Old Testament regarding the Church.
Here is what I wrote in response:
David, great to hear from you, and thanks for watching my YouTubes!
I am not surprised at all at this radical change. Dispensationalists are—to be kind—like mercury. When you demonstrate the fallacy of one of their key arguments, they suddenly create a brand new set of arguments and proclaim that they never even believed what you refuted in the first place!
The thing is, that is they admit that Joel and Psalms 110 were fulfilled, and thus, Pentecost is not part of the postponement, that this simply creates more problems for them!
1.) If the kingdom was not postponed until Stephen, this means that Stephen’s death was more important than Jesus’ in regard to an expression of Jewish unbelief. Why would God postpone the kingdom for the death of Stephen, and not His Son?
2.) The indisputable fact is that the outpouring of the Spirit was the fulfillment of the OT prophecies made to Israel. Since they are admitting this, one has the right to ask: if God withdrew the kingdom offer with the stoning of Stephen, why didn’t He withdraw the Spirit as a sign of the postponement? Very clearly, He did not withdraw the Spirit! Thus, since the outpouring of the Spirit was a sign of the impending kingdom, the continuing presence of the Spirit was a continuing sign of the imminence—not the postponement—of the kingdom.
3.) All the NT writers continue to affirm the fulfillment of Psalms 110—not the delay or postponement. So, like the continuing presence of the Spirit, the ongoing proclamation of the enthronement of Jesus falsifies the notion of a postponement.
This new “twist” on the time of postponement is just another desperate attempt to escape the reality that in truth there was not delay, no postponement.
I might suggest my book Seal Up Vision and Prophecy for a fuller discussion of the postponement doctrine. It has a ton of material in it on whether there could be a gap in the 70 week countdown.
Thanks again for watching and for your interest!
Make your plans to be with us this July 19-21, 2012, for our Preterist Pilgrim Weekend!
Instead of a conference, there will be a formal public debate between Don K. Preston and Joel McDurmon of American Vision (Gary DeMar’s organization) This promises to be a landmark debate, so make your plans to be with us!
Don K. Preston